Regulation

The push in Congress for the Internet sales tax may have died down some since the measure cleared the Senate back in May, but a new poll shows bipartisan opposition to the proposed measure currently stalled in the House.

The R Street/NTU survey also shows that nearly 66% of Republicans, 56% of independents and a plurality of Democrats oppose the Internet sales tax. Among ideologies, 65% of conservatives and 55% of moderates oppose the measure. A plurality of liberal also opposed the measure, at 47/45, though that was in the polls margin of error.

Landrieu, who has served in the Senate since 1997, is thought to be one of the most vulnerable Democrats facing re-election next year and the outcome of the race could determine whether Republicans take control of the chamber. But it looks like Landrieu and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) will have their work cut out for them if they hope to retain control of the seat.

“The poll, conducted for Conservative Intel last week by Harper Polling, shows the three-term senator trailing, 47 to 45 percent, against U.S. Rep. Bill Cassidy, a Republican representing most of the Baton Rouge area,” wrote David Freddoso, editor of the conservative site.

“This despite the fact that Cassidy, a medical doctor who announced his candidacy in April, is not very well known throughout the state — 59 percent of the 596 likely voters surveyed did not know enough about him to form a favorable or unfavorable opinion,” he added. “Cassidy’s lead is well within the poll’s four-point margin of error, so the two should be considered in a statistical tie. On the generic ballot, 42 percent of respondents said they would prefer to elect a Republican, versus 41 percent who wanted a Democrat to win.”

Imagine that you’ve come up with a great idea to build a niche in the rental car industry that brilliantly minimizes the typical overhead costs that most rental car companies incur. The business is taking off and all seems to be going great when, of course, regulators start asking questions.

That’s what happened to three incredibly talented teenagers in San Francisco. The trio, all of whom had been offered admission to prestigious schools in the northeast, had started a rental car business, FlightCar, in which they offered incentives to travelling passengers to let them rent their vehicles while they were out of town to other travelers.

CEO Rajul Zaparde, 18, one of FlightCar’s co-founders, tells ABC News the company already has signed up 1,400 owners and has arranged 1,500 rentals.

Until Zaparde hit rental car paydirt, he had been headed to Harvard. Now he and co-founders Shri Graneshram, 19, and Kevin Petrovic, 19, have launched a second operation at Boston’s Logan Airport.

Foes of FlightCar, however, have started to shoot back.

It’s easy to see how traditional rental companies might not be amused to have their prices undercut. But San Francisco International is crying foul, as well.

Doug Yakel, public information officer for SFO, tells ABC News that FlightCar refuses to play by the rules that govern other rental car companies. It doesn’t pay the same fees, he says, and it doesn’t abide by the same regulations.

Though it was a praised as a win for consumers, the effect of the Durbin amendment has been for banks to seek revenue they’ve lost because of the price control on the fee by shifting the burden onto account holders — either by eliminating free checks accounts, rewards programs, and/or increasing other account holder-related fees.

Writing last week at Forbes, Timothy Lee, Senior Vice-President of Legal and Public Affairs for the Center for Individual Freedom, explained the Durbin amendment “cost banks over $8 billion in the first year alone.” Lee notes these consequences have caused former Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA), the House sponsor of the financial reform law, to support it repeal:

How disastrous has the Durbin Amendment proven? Well, even Barney Frank, the famously hyper-regulatory coauthor of Dodd-Frank itself, acknowledged that the amendment harms consumers rather than helps them. Frank also supported legislative measures to revisit it, adding, “I believe that a free market approach in this area will be better for the economy and all concerned parties than the current system.”

When Barney Frank sings the praises of the free market as a superior alternative, it speaks volumes.

We heard it on the floor of the House of Representatives yesterday from Rep. Tom Graves (R-GA). He made it very clear to his fellow members that the vote to repeal ObamaCare was a “vote to stop the IRS.”

Sarah Hall Ingram served as commissioner of the office responsible for tax-exempt organizations between 2009 and 2012. But Ingram has since left that part of the IRS and is now the director of the IRS’ Affordable Care Act office, the IRS confirmed to ABC News today.

The White House and leading congressional Democrats are still trying to fight back against critics of ObamaCare, but their specious case isn’t convincing skeptical small business owners. According to a recent survey from Gallup, only 9% believe that the law will help them, while 48% of small business owners believe ObamaCare is going to be bad for business:

To show how deep the concern over the law goes and the messaging problem before apologists of the law, only 13% of small business owners believe that ObamaCare will improve quality of healthcare.

FreeEnterprise.com, the official blog of the United States Chamber of Commerce, also points to a separate poll of business owners showing the confusion over ObamaCare and points to the fact that “41% said [of sma held off on hiring workers, and 38% said they’ve pulled back on growing their businesses because of the law.”

President Barack Obama, who has increased the national debt by $53,377 per household, has proclaimed April “National Financial Capability Month,” during which his administration will do things such as teach young people “how to budget responsibly.”

“I call upon all Americans to observe this month with programs and activities to improve their understanding of financial principles and practices,” Obama said in an official proclamation released Friday.[…]“Together, we can prepare young people to tackle financial challenges—from learning how to budget responsibly to saving for college, starting a business, or opening a retirement account,” he said.

Do you live in a free state? This question would receive a variety of answers because, after all, the 50 states make up our Union each have their own versions and views on freedom.

Politicians on the “left coast” view freedom as “freedom from want,” which is why they have set in place a vast — and costly — welfare state and burdensome regulatory policies. The north isn’t too dissimilar, especially with its emphasis on nanny state policies.

States that comprise the “libertarian west” and the south tend to have fiscally conservative-leanings and the approach toward personal liberty is, while not great on every issue, generally much less regulated.

The authors of the report, William Ruger and Jason Sorens, explained their findings yesterday and concluded that states that clamp down on freedoms are seeing people leave for states with more freedom.

“The more a state denies people their freedoms, increases their taxes or passes laws that make it hard for businesses to hire and fire, the more likely they are to leave,” wrote the authors of the report. “And while there’s clearly more to life than drinking oversized beverages and eating foie gras, the states that won’t allow you to often cause trouble for their residents in other ways.”

At Mobile World Congress in Barcelona last month, I was surprised that nobody had access to 4G mobile Internet services. How could Barcelona, the second largest city in Spain and host to the “world’s premier mobile industry event,” lack access to 4G? In the opening day keynote session, Vittorio Colao, Vodafone’s CEO, said Europe has only 6% of the world’s LTE connections, and Telefónica’s CEO, César Alierta, said only 17% of European mobile subscribers have smartphones. European mobile operators agreed they are lagging the world in 4G deployment and penetration due to existing price regulations that discourage new infrastructure investments.

Europe now stands at a crossroads: Does it adopt the modern, investment-based approach toward wireless markets that made the US the world’s 4G leader, or does it further increase regulation and impose new obligations on “over the top” (e.g., Skype) services? Our history with the regulation of rural telephone companies demonstrates the perils of the second option. Yet European mobile operators appear ready to embrace new regulations as a means to enhance their business and create a “balanced relationship” with “US companies” that provide over the top (OTT) services.

The Club for Growth, one of Washington’s most high-profile conservative organizations, released its annual scorecard earlier this week, providing a measure of who in Congress is fighting to reduce government spending and regulation.

The scorecard shows how members of House of Representatives and the Senate voted during the 2012 session on key, pro-growth issues ranging from keeping the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts in place to capping transportation spending to expanding free trade to banning earmarks.

“Whether it was the GOP’s support of massive tax increases or the constant assault on liberty by the Obama administration, the pro-growth caucus in Congress has a lot of work to do in 2013,” Club for Growth President Chris Chocola explained in a statement. “The Club’s scorecard is intended to help our members and the general public understand who talks a good game on limiting government and passing pro-growth policies, and who backs up their words with votes.”

So who in Congress have been working for the taxpayer? Obviously, we can’t list everybody who scored well, for sake of space, so we’re going to limit it to the top in each chamber. You can find the 2012 scorecard by clicking here.